Trevino v. The State of California

Background

Robert Trevino, identified as a state prisoner, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. A writ of mandamus is a court order directing a government body or official to take or refrain from taking a specific action. Trevino sought an order concerning a state case and a file from the District Attorney’s Office. He stated that his state mandamus request had been converted into a state habeas case and denied by the California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court.

Screening standard

Because Trevino sought relief from governmental defendants, the court screened the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. That law requires the court to identify claims that can proceed and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, legally insufficient, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also noted that filings from people without lawyers are read liberally, but they must still include enough factual allegations to state a plausible claim.

Court’s analysis

The court held that federal district courts do not have the power to issue mandamus orders directing state courts, state judicial officers, or other state officials in the performance of their duties. It described a petition seeking that relief as frivolous as a matter of law. Based on that rule, the court concluded that the action had to be dismissed and that no amendment could cure the deficiency.

Disposition

The court granted Trevino’s motion to proceed without paying the filing fee. It dismissed the action with prejudice as frivolous, dismissed it without leave to amend, and directed the clerk to close the case. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton signed the order.